Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews PSBA-recommended changes to educator-conduct and employee free-speech policies
Summary
The policy committee reviewed PSBA-updated Policy 317 (code of conduct), Policy 317.1 (educator misconduct/Title IX updates) and Policy 320 (employee freedom of speech); members asked staff to confirm whether the PSBA language is mandatory or advisory and to consult the solicitor before final edits.
Get email alerts on the Personnel Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Quakertown’s policy committee discussed several PSBA-recommended updates on Aug. 4 to district personnel policies governing educator conduct and employee speech.
Dr. Kelly Hoffman said Policy 317 was updated to emphasize the district’s responsibility to investigate allegations prior to considering dismissal or demotion for employees. “There are some changes in here that will cover the district in the event that we do believe that there is some type of disciplinary action warranted for an employee just to ensure that that we follow all of the appropriate steps prior to filing any dismissal or demotion charges,” Hoffman said. She added that the updates had been reviewed by HR and legal counsel.
Committee members also reviewed Policy 317.1, which updates language tied to Title IX harassment obligations, and Policy 320, retitled “freedom of speech by employees.” The PSBA language for Policy 320 lists a set of criteria under which an employee’s speech may be addressed when it affects workplace efficiency or creates a reasonable likelihood of disruption. Mr. Kern objected to two of PSBA’s examples — “impairing discipline by superiors” and “harmony among coworkers” — as vague and potentially subject to misuse. He asked staff to ask PSBA whether those specific phrases originate from statute or case law; the committee agreed to have the solicitor review the language before any final edits.
Hoffman said staff will check whether PSBA’s phrasing is legally required and, if not, seek alternative wording or examples that are clearer. “I think maybe if we just check on that first as a first step and find out before we try to edit it too much,” she said. No policy was adopted on Aug. 4; the committee directed staff to obtain legal guidance and return redlined drafts for committee consideration.

